RNW reported that the former Bishop of Breda, Rt Rev Tiny Muskens, has told a television programme that he and his fellow bishops were "astounded" by an answer given by Cardinal Ratzinger after the question of clerical celibacy was raised during an Ad Limina visit. The Radio station quoted Bishop Muskens, who said: "When the Dutch bishops asked the cardinal, then one of the most powerful men in Vatican, about the propect of introducing marriage for priests, he answered: 'I don’t see that happening in the coming ten years'". The former Bishop of Breda, who has already called for a relaxation of the celibacy rule, added: “We expected him to be against married priests on principle. This, however, meant he was open to discussing the possibility.”
Of course, now that Joseph Ratzinger is the Supreme Pontiff he isn't as free to speculate about such things as he once was when a mere cardinal. But, if what Bishop Muskens reports is true, then we might now have a Pope who is, as a man, willing to consider alternatives to the strict rules that require priests of the Latin Church to be unmarried. Personally, and even as quite a traditionalist, I think this might actually be a good thing - here's why: -
1) Now that many married former clergy from Anglicanism and Lutheranism, as well as at least one Baptist minister, have been ordained Catholic priests, it does seem rather odd (if not unjust) that those men who have been faithful to the Catholic Church throughout their lives must sacrifice family life in order to minister within the priesthood. Why should newcomers alone get to "have their cake and eat it" so to speak? If we already have married priests now serving the Latin Rite Church, why not allow some cradle-Catholic married men to do the same?
2) Catholic priests belonging to Eastern Rites within the Catholic Church are allowed to marry, just like those clergymen in the Orthodox Church. Of course, these men must already have been married before their ordination, whilst unmarried priests promise to remain celibate in the same way as those who belong to the Latin Church must do. In both the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Church, the episcopacy is reserved for celibates only - meaning that some sacrifices are still made by married clergy. Most would agree that the Eastern Churches have withstood modernism far more effectively than we have in the Western Church. Obviously, then, it seems that having married priests wouldn't automatically lead to a watering down of faith and morals or to the desacralisation of the priesthood.
3) The issue of homosexuality in the Catholic priesthood is a serious one. For example, there are many young men who have been put off from testing priestly vocations because seminaries are (rightly or wrongly) viewed as "gay hostels." Also, we should not have a priesthood that is so contrary to society at large - priests should reflect the communities they serve. But, whereas only 1.5 - 2% of humanity has a tendency towards homosexuality, some reports suggest that as many as 30 - 50% of Catholic priests suffer from this disorder (see Catholic Apologetics International, which quotes various surveys). My feeling is that lots of healthy vocations are put off the priesthood precisely because it seems to have effectively become a "gay profession" in many parts of the West. Allowing married men to become priests would therefore begin to redress this homosexual problem within the priesthood. It is quite telling that many noticed an increase in "camp priests" precisely during the 1970's onwards - a period when tens of thousands of heterosexual priests left the priesthood in order to get married.
There are many arguments against having married priests, of course, but the issue itself is one of Church discipline, so is not "fixed" - unlike the question of women priests. The Church has had married priests in the past and would not enter heresy or chaos where she to allow this practice once more. Of course, most priests would still feel called to celibacy even if the celibacy rule was relaxed to accommodate married men. Those married men seeking ordination would probably also have to provide for their own families (meaning that only a few could afford to be married priests) - such as is the case with Ordinariate clergymen who have wives and children.
Ultimately, though, opening up the priestly ministry to married men might begin to solve the problem that for many the priesthood - often viewed as a "gay profession" - has become something to snigger at. It would also mean that Catholic laity would feel more united to their priests if they knew that the priesthood was not in danger of becoming an order of the effete. The sacred priesthood of Jesus Christ should never be allowed to become some kind of pagan cult reserved for the sexually disordered, but must always be a place open to sexually healthy men (celibate or not) who are attracted to the opposite sex.
14 comments:
Bah!
Morning Dylan
@ David Werling
Could you be more explicit please? (Your profile describes you as "choleric")
Here's a chance to get it off your chest. (:
A timely post. Can't get my head round the cradle Catholic who converted to Anglicanism, later got married and has now returned to the RC Church as a much loved priest with his wife and family. "cake and eat it"?
I'm sure he is sincere but for some it may become a way around the problem.
His faithful celibate colleagues, who have given up the chance of family life and experience human loneliness, must wonder at this after Mass when their fellow priest goes home to a Sunday roast and a cuddle with his wife and children.
On the gay issue-that subject usually sends the blogcounter stats. into overdrive!
Brace yourself!
The suggestion that marriage might be good for the priesthood is an interesting one. I wonder, nevertheless, whether the other side of the "equation" has been considered- would the priesthood be good for marriage? How might the demands of priestly life impact upon wives, and, even more important, in my view, upon children?
@ Terry
Thank you.
I often wonder the same thing and have actually met men who are considering doing that - i.e. becoming Anglican / joining the Ordinariate (they accept former any Catholic with an Anglican past), getting married and then re-converting. Apostasy usually barred men from the priesthood, but not nowadays it seems.
@ Patricius
Thank you.
I haven't really thought it through, of course. But, have to say that I've never seen anything wrong with allowing (some) priests to marry / remain married. It's always been the one possible "change" I could easily accept as a traditionalist / orthodox Catholic.
There might be some problems, of course, but being married doesn't seem to have adverse consequences for Orthodox priests.
I have always been very glad with this blog, but what I now hear does surprise me.
Unfortunately, I do not agree with giving up Celibacy, for a couple of reasons actually.
First of all it is important to understand what Celibacy means, what is the theology behind it, and why does the Church thinks this is so important.
I have, at my Seminary, had a course about Celibacy, and the course made me understand it much better now.
Also, what I agree with Patrick is, that the Prieshood is not fit for marriage, for it is the selvegiving of one person to the whole community, as to say is "married" with the Church.
Also even the Orthodox Church admits that it is better to have priests live celibate than not, and if I am correct is that with married vicars or priests, there is the highest rate of devorsion.
For more information I am willing to write an article about celibacy.
Also, please, keep in mind: the Dutch press is very unreliable and what it quotes is most of the time out of context.
God bless,
Anton Goos
On the subject of ordaining homosexuals to the priesthood, it seems to me - based on the statistics and on meeting current seminarians - that there is a huge gap between what Rome has said, and what the local Church is doing. In addition to the Congregation for Education's document on the subject, we have Pope Benedict's own words as reported in his Light of the World interview:
"Homosexuality is incompatible with the priestly vocation. Otherwise, celibacy would lose its meaning as a renunciation. It would be extremely dangerous if celibacy became a sort of pretext for bringing people into the priesthood who don’t want to get married anyway. For, in the end, their attitude toward man and woman is somehow distorted, off center and, in any case, is not within the direction of creation of which we have spoken... The greatest attention is needed here in order to prevent the intrusion of this kind of ambiguity and to head off a situation where the celibacy of priests would practically end up being identified with the tendency to homosexuality."
Young men who present themselves for ordination while knowing themselves to suffer from this disorder are no different to those who marry women under false pretences; the subsequent ministry, the very relationship between priest and Church, is based on a lie, and the consequences can - as we have seen - be tremendously damaging. Still, it's hard not to feel that greater fault rests with those who turn a blind eye to such applicants' problems. Frequently these are the same men who have utterly failed to promote models of faithful living for people with this problem.
@ Anton
Thank you.
I would be interested to read your article on celibacy.
My main concern sometimes is that those priests I know who are the most defensive when it comes to celibacy are also the ones who probably aren't the marrying kind.
As for the theology, then I agree with you wholeheartedly. Also, I think my post kind of mentioned that celibacy would always be preferred in the Latin Church even if she decided to become more like her Sister in the East.
God bless. D
@ Salubrious
You make very valid points, which I'm sure many of us agree with.
But, how can we change this culture that seems to have infected the Western Church?
Your last comment was timed 21.16pm so I hope you have recorded the Assisted Dying programme which mentioned a Catholic priest whose life was ended at the facility assisted by a "religious" doctor.
The problem of celibacy may be relevant here- loneliness. Even an intractable homosexual orientation can lead to despair and suicide.
The subjects of the programme were not old, had loved ones, not at all what I expected to see. They were not terminally ill or in terrible pain at that point in time.
I do hope you watch the replay and comment.
Thank you.
@ Mark
Thank you for your comment. I will try and watch the programme, which I missed and hadn't heard about - I watched something about Stalin's leadership during WWII.
As one who suffers from depression my fear is that such a programme might not be very healthy for me to watch. It sounds frightening that society seems to be moving towards the notion of "assisted dying".
If I remember, the priest was discussed in the debate afterwards with Jeremy Paxman and a group that included an Anglican bishop.
The priest was not shown in the film.
It was not depressing, just very odd indeed. So hard to believe it was really happening in the bright, cheerful surroundings. Background music added to the sense of unreality.
I would not "recommend" it if I felt it would have a negative influence on you. Just the opposite in fact if, like me, expressing your anger actually lifts ones mood.
Watch it and have a good rant on the blog and I guarantee you will feel much better! Stalin is much more depressing.
Remember "Every hair of your head is numbered".
@ Mark
You're right... Blogging can sometimes be quite therapeutic! And, yes, Stalin is an extremely depressing subject!
I will try and find the programme on the BBC iPlayer tomorrow.
God bless.
If you do watch the programme, you might want to recollect the words of words of Our Lord at the end:
"I thirst"
I can't help seeing something very important here.
From a Christian viewpoint that alone made the programme worthwhile.
Perhaps you could expand on that thought. I suspect there will be a few sermons based on it if we can look beyond the indignation.
It is tempting to feel that married priests have it easier but I think it is actually the opposite. It is far harder to hold two vocations together at once. I think having celibacy as the norm in the Latin Church recognises this.
Post a Comment